From owner-freebsd-arch Tue Oct 10 9:52:42 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (flutter.freebsd.dk [212.242.40.147]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BC8237B502; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 09:52:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from critter (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by critter.freebsd.dk (8.11.0/8.9.3) with ESMTP id e9AGqZN72576; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 18:52:35 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk) To: Matt Dillon Cc: Robert Watson , Kris Kennaway , Terry Lambert , arch@FreeBSD.ORG, Warner Losh , Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/etc inetd.conf In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 10 Oct 2000 09:20:50 PDT." <200010101620.e9AGKoo13270@earth.backplane.com> Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 18:52:35 +0200 Message-ID: <72574.971196755@critter> From: Poul-Henning Kamp Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In message <200010101620.e9AGKoo13270@earth.backplane.com>, Matt Dillon writes: > I don't see much of a point trying to restrict ourselves to the lowest > common denominator - some joe sysadmin who isn't willing to run unix on > a laptop or who isn't willing to buy a single program for windows to > access a machine securely. I am not asking for us to "restrict ourselves to the lowest common denominator". I'm asking that we leave the lower bound where it is. I am very happy that machines come online with sshd working now, that's a great step forward in many cases, just not in all cases. Besides: Considering that we have not allowed remote root logins for quite some time, having telnetd enabled on a freshly installed box poses no security hole: there are no accounts to break in to. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD coreteam member | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message